Fischhoff NNI 130911 - Nano · -- pool lessons learned -- anticipate problems -- involve academic...
Transcript of Fischhoff NNI 130911 - Nano · -- pool lessons learned -- anticipate problems -- involve academic...
Risk Analysis
Baruch Fischhoff Carnegie Mellon University
Department of Social and Decision Sciences Department of Engineering and Public Policy
http://www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/people/faculty/baruch-fischhoff.html
National Nanotechnology Initiative Workshop on Stakeholder Perspectives on the Perception, Assessment, and Management of the
Potential Risks of Nanotechnology
September 11, 2013
Process Pitfalls Proposals
Overview
Process Pitfalls Proposals
Overview
cryptosporidium intrusions into domestic water supplies
Waterborne Disease
Casman, E., Fischhoff, B., Palmgren, C., Small, M., & Wu, F. (2000). Integrated risk model of a drinking waterborne Cryptosporidiosis outbreak. Risk Analysis, 20, 493-509
Routine testing water
type
routine testing type
treatment levels
treatment options
index variables for tables
Routine Testing Results
Utility Awareness
Health Department Awareness
Media Coverage
Consumer Awareness for Public Systems
Tap Test
Medical Awareness
Trigger Event
Well Test
Consumer Awareness for Private Wells
Utility Communique
Utility Treatment
Options
Consumption of Well Water
Consumption of Treated Water
Averting Behavior for
Public Systems
Averting Behavior for Private Wells
Special Studies
Joint Task Force
Health EffectsContamination of Drinking Water
Info Sources
Miscellaneous Announcement
-
Un i t s : Averting_behavior
Def in i t i on : if consumer_awareness =0 then 0elseif consumer_awareness =1 then 1 else if info_sources > 0 then 2else 2
Inputs : Consumer_a… Consumer Awareness for Public SystemsInfo_sources Info Sources
Outputs: Consumptio… Consumption of Treated Water
Dec is ion
T i t l e : Averting Behavior for Public Systems
Descr ipt ion : Do consumers do something to avoid any possible risk of cryptosporidial infection?
Correct averting behavior includes boiling drinking water and switching to safe water sources. Washing dishes, tooth brushing, and rinsing vegetables are not presently considered high risk behaviors for immunocompetent people in developed countries. Showering is not risky. Only filters with an absolute (not nominal) pore size ≤ 1 micron can effectively remove oocysts. (MMWR, 1995) Use of other types of filters do not constitute correct averting behavior.
reference:MMWR 1995. Assessing the public health threat associated with waterborne cryptosporidiosis: report of a workshop. Rep. 44(RR-6):1-19.
0 = no action or inappropriate action (eg charcoal filter)1 = avoid most tap water2 = boil drinking water or use clean bottled water
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
0 5 10 15 20 25Day Utility Becomes Aware of Contamination &
Issues Boil Water Alert
normal consumercompliancenearly complete consumer compliance
epidemic averted
14 1-10
14
10
7 4
1
days to repair
days to repair
Create clear, shared definitions of variables and relationships
Identify critical expertise Organize existing evidence Organize emerging evidence Estimate risk and uncertainty
Adequate Risk Models
Adequate Communications
Contain the information that people need in accessible places and comprehensible form.
Inform the risk management process early enough to affect the design.
Process Pitfalls Proposals
Overview
Pitfall #1
Assuming that risk can be defined objectively.
Defining “Risk of Death”
probability of premature death
Defining “Risk of Death”
probability of premature death vs.
expected life-years lost
Defining “Risk of Death”
probability of premature death vs.
expected life-years lost
The choice of metric depends on whether a death is a death or one values deaths of young people more.
Other Possible Bases for Distinguishing among Deaths
Are the risks distributed equitably assumed voluntarily catastrophic well understood controllable dread borne by future generations
… Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. L. & Keeney, R. L. (1981). Acceptable risk. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Other Possible Risk Outcomes
injuries illnesses pre-term births child abuse and neglect unrealized potential …
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. L. & Keeney, R. L. (1981). Acceptable risk. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Definitions
The terms of any analysis embody values that favor some interests.
When transparent, those assumptions are controversial.
As a result, common metrics obscure value issues, unless adopted by a credible public process.
Reasons to value future outcomes less -- valuing them less
deliberately unthinkingly (hyperbolic discounting)
-- opportunity costs -- not expecting to have them provided -- not expecting to be there to get them -- dreading the wait -- wanting to live with the experience
“Discounting” Future Outcomes
Frederick S, et al. [2002]. Time discounting and temporal preference. Journal of Economic Literature 40: 331-401
Pitfall #2
Limiting analyses to readily available experts and evidence.
Routine testing water
type
routine testing type
treatment levels
treatment options
index variables for tables
Routine Testing Results
Utility Awareness
Health Department Awareness
Media Coverage
Consumer Awareness for Public Systems
Tap Test
Medical Awareness
Trigger Event
Well Test
Consumer Awareness for Private Wells
Utility Communique
Utility Treatment
Options
Consumption of Well Water
Consumption of Treated Water
Averting Behavior for
Public Systems
Averting Behavior for Private Wells
Special Studies
Joint Task Force
Health EffectsContamination of Drinking Water
Info Sources
Miscellaneous Announcement
-
Xenotransplantation
Does pig have a virus?
Is patient infected?
Can infection spread?
Potential for outbreak
No outbreak Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Bruine de Bruin, W., Güvenç, Ü. Et al. (2009). Communicating about xenotransplanation: Models and scenarios. Risk Analysis, 29, 1105-1115
(4) Degree of Genetic
Modification to Pig
(to avoid organ rejection)
(5) Degree that pig
virus looks human
(7) Ability of patient’s
immune system to destroy pig
virus
(13) Probability that
human virus will infect a
cell in patient
(11) Probability
that patient is exposed to
human virus
(10) Ability of patient’s immune
system to destroy human
virus
(9) Probability
that pig virus will infect a
cell in patient
(16) Ability of patient’s
immune system to destroy
recombined virus
(17) Infectivity of recombined
virus
(18) Probability that patient
will get infected with recombined
virus
(3) Type of cell
that gets infected
(2) Type
of Human
Virus
(1) Type of Pig Virus in pig organ
1
3
2
3
3
1
2
3
1 2
2
1
Pig Virus Recombined with Human Virus
Pig Virus
Human Virus
Indices
1
(6) Degree to
which patient’s immune
system is suppressed
1
2
(12) Natural
propensity of human virus to
infect a cell
(14) Compatibility of pig virus and human
virus for recombinatio
n
(15) Probability of recombination to make a new virus
(8) Natural
propensity of pig virus to infect a cell
Behavioral Response Modeling
Physical Dispersion Modeling
1. Explosion/Delivery
Model
2. Transport/Deposition/
Resuspension Model
4. Population Distribution
Model
5. Public Response Model -Evacuation -Shelter in Place
6. Public Health Model -Trauma Fatalities -Cancer Fatalities
3. Radioactive Source
Term
Fatalities
Evacuation Strategies
Dombroski, M., Fischhoff, B., & Fischbeck, P. (2006). Predicting emergency evacuation and sheltering behavior: A structured analytical approach. Risk Analysis, 26, 1675-1688
Representing Uncertain Knowledge
Campbell, P. (2011). Understanding the receivers and the receptions of science’s uncertain messages. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 369, 4891-4912.
Morgan, M.G. & Keith, D. (1995). Environmental Science and Technology, 29, 468-476.
Pitfall #3
Choosing to fly blind when communicating.
Adequate Communications
Contain the information that people need in accessible places and comprehensible form.
Inform the risk management process early enough to affect the design.
Adequate Communications Require Research
Because our intuitions are often faulty.
Common Knowledge Effect
Exaggerating how much other people share our knowledge.
As a result, failing to provide critical information.
Adequate Communications Require Research
Because our intuitions are often faulty. Because behavior is always complex.
Some Principles of Judgment
People are good at tracking what they see, but not at detecting sample bias.
People have difficulty projecting non- linear trends.
People have limited ability to evaluate the extent of their own knowledge.
People have difficulty imagining themselves in other visceral states.
People can be affected by transient emotions.
Some Principles of Choice
People can be prisoners to sunk costs, hating to recognize losses.
People dislike uncertainty. People consider the return on their
investment in making decisions. People are insensitive to opportunity costs. People may not know what they want,
especially with novel questions.
Process Pitfalls Proposals
Overview
Risk Management Requires
Domain specialists Risk and decision analysts Behavioral scientists Systems specialists
37
Proposal #1
Creating an independent resource center available to those who don’t know where to go when looking for risk management help.
Resource Center Goals
publication-quality scientific support for -- quality assurance -- economies of scope -- pool lessons learned -- anticipate problems -- involve academic researchers
39
Proposal #2
Standardize procedures for making and communicating about decisions.
FDA. (2013). Structured approach to benefit-risk assessment for drug regulatory decision making. Draft PDUFA V implementation plan (2/13). FY2013-2017.
http://www.vaoutcomes.org/
Proposal #3
Create shared understanding by common knowledge of essential scientific approaches.
Proposal #3
Create shared understanding by common knowledge of essential scientific approaches. Seek fluency, not technical mastery.
Consensus Report Edited Readings
NAS Report for DNI
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13040 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13062
Essential Analytical Methods
Risk analysis Decision analysis Signal detection theory Game theory Economics Behavioral psychology Communications …
Fischhoff, B., & Kadvany, J. (2011). Risk: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morgan, M.G., & Henrion, M. (1990). Uncertainty. New York: Cambridge. Kahneman, D. (2009). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Ferrar Giroux Strauss. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/ucm268078.htm
http://www.pnas.org/content/110/Supplement_3 http://www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/completed_colloquia/science-communication.html
http://www.nasonline.org/programs/sackler-colloquia/upcoming_colloquia/science-communication II.html
Books Fischhoff, B., Brewer, N., & Downs, J.S. (eds.). (2011). Communicating risks and benefits: An
evidence-based user’s guide. Washington, DC: Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/ucm268078.htm
Fischhoff, B., & Chauvin, C. (eds.). (2011). Intelligence analysis: Behavioral and social science foundations. Washington, DC: National Academy Presshttp://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13062
Fischhoff, B., & Kadvany, J. (2011). Risk: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. L. & Keeney, R. L. (1981). Acceptable risk. New
York: Cambridge University Press. (NUREG/CR-1614). Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar Giroux & Strauss. Morgan, M.G., Henrion, M. (1990). Uncertainty. New York: Cambridge University Press. Slovic, P. (ed.) (2000). Perception of risk. London: Earthscan.
Research Articles Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A., & Fischhoff, B. (2007) Individual differences in adult decision-making
competence (A-DMC). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92, 938-956. Fischhoff, B. (1992). Giving advice: Decision theory perspectives on sexual assault. American
Psychologist, 47, 577-588. Fischhoff, B. (2011). Communicating the risks of terrorism (and anything else). American Psychologist,
66, 520-531. Fischhoff, B. (2012, Summer). Communicating uncertainty: Fulfilling the duty to inform. Issues in
Science and Technology, 29, 63-70 , Fischhoff, B., Bruine de Bruin, W., Guvenc, U., Caruso, D., & Brilliant, L. (2006). Analyzing disaster
risks and plans: An avian flu example. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 33, 133-151.
http://www.hss.cmu.edu/departments/sds/src/faculty/fischhoff.php Carnegie Mellon Electricity Center: http://wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/ceic/ Center for Climate and Environmental Decision Making: http://cedm.epp.cmu.edu/index.php Center for Risk Perception and Communication: http://sds.hss.cmu.edu/risk/ Center for Human Rights Science: http://www.cmu.edu/chrs/